Creative Commons License

IS JAMES COMEY PROTECTING THE OBAMACONS?

Styling himself as sort of a Captain America, upholding the Constitution and all that is good and holy, we can plainly see that it is all political theater. A kabuki dance of political operatives caught-up in an unnecessarily sticky situation. There is no doubt that the progressive socialist Democrats have lost their collective minds over the transcendence of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. And, even worse, are trying to delegitimize Trump’s presidency with manufactured scandals. Mostly to mislead and misdirect the American public from the fact that former President Barack Obama was complicit in activities that were either unconstitutional or illegal under federal law, or maybe both.

Comey’s never-ending investigations to provide shade for Obama Administration clear illegality in providing weapons to Mexican drug cartels to influence domestic gun control legislation, to cover-up the deliberately botched investigation of wrongdoing in Benghazi – especially when it comes to allegations of providing military-grade weapons to Islamic terrorists, the IRS scandal which interfered with a presidential election by denying fundraising capability to one side of the political spectrum, and the clear criminality of Hillary Clinton and her cohorts involving allegations of obstruction of justice, destruction of government documents, lying to investigators, suborning perjury, and violating the Espionage Act.

It is clear that on some occasions Comey has usurped the reins of power from the Department of Justice and has made decisions and taken action that was clearly inappropriate. How Comey could lay out the case against Hillary Clinton and then decline to recommend prosecution based on his deliberately altering existing law is reason enough for him to be investigated along with the other denizens of the swamp;.

But that’s the point. When the false allegations of Russian involvement with the Trump campaign could not be substantiated, the Democrats turned to semantics and the procedural prosecution of the President. All to avoid looking back over the significant and severe issues that surfaced under Obama.

So what did we learn from Comey’s testimony?

First, realize that Comey was not subpoenaed, but appeared voluntarily – giving him the right to refuse to answer certain questions without needing to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege.

Comey is a fine public actor, well-spoken and polished in his presentation.

Comey is inappropriately selective when it comes to reporting up the chain of command.

Comey has no problem illegally and inappropriately seizing the leadership power of the Department of Justice.

Comey has deliberately leaked privileged government documents to the news media through an intermediary to bring about political action. And yet, Comey refused to give the memo to the appropriate congressional committees.

Comey apparently thinks that the FBI is an independent agency; apparently not realizing that there are political checks and balances on the FBI’s tremendous power.

Comey cannot apparently differentiate between “hope” and an “order” to take action. As if Comey attended Bill Clinton’s course on legal word parsing for political advantage. Comey is not in the military where a commander’s wishes are taken as de facto orders. Comey is a civilian with an extensive background in the Department of Justice and the FBI. Orders involving the Department of Justice are usually transmitted through the Attorney General of the United States, not given directly to the Director of the FBI. But, the President does have the power to order the investigation of any individual or entity, close existing investigations, or otherwise direct the DOJ and FBI as he is the de facto head of both Agencies that report to the Executive branch of the government.

Comey was specifically told by President Trump to get to the bottom of it – with respect to the President’s “satellites.”

This does not sound like a President trying to shut down an investigation; just the straight talk from a rather simple, boorish, and crude billionaire celebrity bully boy.

Artificially created credibility?

How is it that almost the entire leadership of the Democrat party (Pelosi, Feinstein, Schumer, Clinton, Reid, et al.) were trashing Comey months ago and now believes he is a man of enormous integrity? Could this have all been a ruse in order to claim that Comey was independent and was being equally attacked by both sides. The implication that he must be fair because both sides appeared to attack him. But, what if this is one of Schumer’s convoluted plans? Where Comey serves as a useful idiot for the Democrats and their progressive agenda?

Yes, Comey felt pressured by Attorney General Loretta Lynch and used her suggestions of language to characterize the investigation into Hillary Clinton; substituting the word “matter” for the harsher and more accurate “investigation.” Like his other self-effacing statements which seemingly add to his credibility before the public.

Trump’s lawyer, Mark Kasowitz, responds …

Relevant Excerpts …

Contrary to numerous false press accounts leading up to today's hearing, Mr. Comey has now finally confirmed publicly what he repeatedly told the President privately: The President was not under investigation as part of any probe into Russian interference. He also admitted that there is no evidence that a single vote changed as a result of any Russian interference.

Mr. Comey's testimony also makes clear that the President never sought to impede the investigation into attempted Russian interference in the 2016 election, and in fact, according to Mr. Comey, the President told Mr. Comey "it would be good to find out" in that investigation if there were "some 'satellite' associates of his who did something wrong." And he did not exclude anyone from that statement.

Consistent with that statement, the President never, in form or substance, directed or suggested that Mr. Comey stop investigating anyone, including suggesting that that Mr. Comey "let Flynn go."

Admiral Rogers testified that the President never "directed [him] to do anything . . . Illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate" and never "pressured [him] to do so." Director Coates said the same thing. The President likewise never pressured Mr. Comey.

The President also never told Mr. Comey, "I need loyalty, I expect loyalty" in form or substance.

Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the President.

Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he leaked to friends his purported memos of these privileged conversations, one of which he testified was classified.

He also testified that immediately after he was terminated he authorized his friends to leak the contents of these memos to the press in order to "prompt the appointment of a special counsel."

Although Mr. Comey testified he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey's excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to entirely retaliatory.

​In sum, it is now established that there the President was not being investigated for colluding with the or attempting to obstruct that investigation.

I cannot help but wonder if, by Comey yoking his allegiance to the Schumer/Clinton wagon, he has doomed himself to live as a highly-paid gunslinger in the deep weeds of the political establishment. And, not the President I think he imagined himself to be. It is not so unbelievable since almost anyone with massive name recognition could run for office in the age of Trump. I cannot help but believe that Comey may have been corrupted in the way many aspiring people to political office are, not by money so much as by the pursuit of power, prestige, perks that comes with high office. And, now there is a stain on his escutcheon, he was fired by President Trump.

Bottom line …

I came to this situation with a young man’s faith in the integrity of the FBI and the justice of courts. Unfortunately, over time my faith has been eroded by the slow recognition that money and power speak here as clearly as anywhere in life. That the quality of your representation often determines your fate. And, he who can buy lawyers with influence can prevail.

The primary question not asked of James Comey is simple. If you thought, after the first meeting, that such contact between yourself and the President of the United States was inappropriate, why did you continue on eight additional times? Why didn’t you just say, I believe this contact is inappropriate and suggest that the President communicate with his Attorney General? And, if you did not trust Donald Trump to tell the future and were compelled to take notes, again, why didn’t you suggest that all contact be handled by the Attorney General? In fact, why did not contemporaneously inform the Attorney General and the White House Counsel of your feelings?

I have little or no doubt that Comey is not above tailoring his story to fit his own political agenda, and seeing the musings of a politically inept President as an ocean of political opportunity. It is my belief that Comey has been politicized, not now, but in previous years – and possibly by that progressive socialist democrat miscreant Chuck Schumer.

Rather than being an observer and reporter of bad news, Comey appears to have crossed the line into a political player. And for this, he should be investigated by the special counsel and held accountable for his actions.

As for President Trump, let us hope that the campaign’s mantra, “let Donald be Donald,” is tempered with prudent advice and a lack of tweets.

There is nothing good here. Once again, we learn that we cannot trust our government, in particular, government agencies that should be neutral and above politics. And that what happens behind closed doors is not always the same story given to the American public.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

Comments

IS JAMES COMEY PROTECTING THE OBAMACONS?

Styling himself as sort of a Captain America, upholding the Constitution and all that is good and holy, we can plainly see that it is all political theater. A kabuki dance of political operatives caught-up in an unnecessarily sticky situation. There is no doubt that the progressive socialist Democrats have lost their collective minds over the transcendence of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. And, even worse, are trying to delegitimize Trump’s presidency with manufactured scandals. Mostly to mislead and misdirect the American public from the fact that former President Barack Obama was complicit in activities that were either unconstitutional or illegal under federal law, or maybe both.

Comey’s never-ending investigations to provide shade for Obama Administration clear illegality in providing weapons to Mexican drug cartels to influence domestic gun control legislation, to cover-up the deliberately botched investigation of wrongdoing in Benghazi – especially when it comes to allegations of providing military-grade weapons to Islamic terrorists, the IRS scandal which interfered with a presidential election by denying fundraising capability to one side of the political spectrum, and the clear criminality of Hillary Clinton and her cohorts involving allegations of obstruction of justice, destruction of government documents, lying to investigators, suborning perjury, and violating the Espionage Act.

It is clear that on some occasions Comey has usurped the reins of power from the Department of Justice and has made decisions and taken action that was clearly inappropriate. How Comey could lay out the case against Hillary Clinton and then decline to recommend prosecution based on his deliberately altering existing law is reason enough for him to be investigated along with the other denizens of the swamp;.

But that’s the point. When the false allegations of Russian involvement with the Trump campaign could not be substantiated, the Democrats turned to semantics and the procedural prosecution of the President. All to avoid looking back over the significant and severe issues that surfaced under Obama.

So what did we learn from Comey’s testimony?

First, realize that Comey was not subpoenaed, but appeared voluntarily – giving him the right to refuse to answer certain questions without needing to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege.

Comey is a fine public actor, well-spoken and polished in his presentation.

Comey is inappropriately selective when it comes to reporting up the chain of command.

Comey has no problem illegally and inappropriately seizing the leadership power of the Department of Justice.

Comey has deliberately leaked privileged government documents to the news media through an intermediary to bring about political action. And yet, Comey refused to give the memo to the appropriate congressional committees.

Comey apparently thinks that the FBI is an independent agency; apparently not realizing that there are political checks and balances on the FBI’s tremendous power.

Comey cannot apparently differentiate between “hope” and an “order” to take action. As if Comey attended Bill Clinton’s course on legal word parsing for political advantage. Comey is not in the military where a commander’s wishes are taken as de facto orders. Comey is a civilian with an extensive background in the Department of Justice and the FBI. Orders involving the Department of Justice are usually transmitted through the Attorney General of the United States, not given directly to the Director of the FBI. But, the President does have the power to order the investigation of any individual or entity, close existing investigations, or otherwise direct the DOJ and FBI as he is the de facto head of both Agencies that report to the Executive branch of the government.

Comey was specifically told by President Trump to get to the bottom of it – with respect to the President’s “satellites.”

This does not sound like a President trying to shut down an investigation; just the straight talk from a rather simple, boorish, and crude billionaire celebrity bully boy.

Artificially created credibility?

How is it that almost the entire leadership of the Democrat party (Pelosi, Feinstein, Schumer, Clinton, Reid, et al.) were trashing Comey months ago and now believes he is a man of enormous integrity? Could this have all been a ruse in order to claim that Comey was independent and was being equally attacked by both sides. The implication that he must be fair because both sides appeared to attack him. But, what if this is one of Schumer’s convoluted plans? Where Comey serves as a useful idiot for the Democrats and their progressive agenda?

Yes, Comey felt pressured by Attorney General Loretta Lynch and used her suggestions of language to characterize the investigation into Hillary Clinton; substituting the word “matter” for the harsher and more accurate “investigation.” Like his other self-effacing statements which seemingly add to his credibility before the public.

Trump’s lawyer, Mark Kasowitz, responds …

Relevant Excerpts …

Contrary to numerous false press accounts leading up to today's hearing, Mr. Comey has now finally confirmed publicly what he repeatedly told the President privately: The President was not under investigation as part of any probe into Russian interference. He also admitted that there is no evidence that a single vote changed as a result of any Russian interference.

Mr. Comey's testimony also makes clear that the President never sought to impede the investigation into attempted Russian interference in the 2016 election, and in fact, according to Mr. Comey, the President told Mr. Comey "it would be good to find out" in that investigation if there were "some 'satellite' associates of his who did something wrong." And he did not exclude anyone from that statement.

Consistent with that statement, the President never, in form or substance, directed or suggested that Mr. Comey stop investigating anyone, including suggesting that that Mr. Comey "let Flynn go."

Admiral Rogers testified that the President never "directed [him] to do anything . . . Illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate" and never "pressured [him] to do so." Director Coates said the same thing. The President likewise never pressured Mr. Comey.

The President also never told Mr. Comey, "I need loyalty, I expect loyalty" in form or substance.

Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the President.

Today, Mr. Comey admitted that he leaked to friends his purported memos of these privileged conversations, one of which he testified was classified.

He also testified that immediately after he was terminated he authorized his friends to leak the contents of these memos to the press in order to "prompt the appointment of a special counsel."

Although Mr. Comey testified he only leaked the memos in response to a tweet, the public record reveals that the New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey's excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to entirely retaliatory.

​In sum, it is now established that there the President was not being investigated for colluding with the or attempting to obstruct that investigation.

I cannot help but wonder if, by Comey yoking his allegiance to the Schumer/Clinton wagon, he has doomed himself to live as a highly-paid gunslinger in the deep weeds of the political establishment. And, not the President I think he imagined himself to be. It is not so unbelievable since almost anyone with massive name recognition could run for office in the age of Trump. I cannot help but believe that Comey may have been corrupted in the way many aspiring people to political office are, not by money so much as by the pursuit of power, prestige, perks that comes with high office. And, now there is a stain on his escutcheon, he was fired by President Trump.

Bottom line …

I came to this situation with a young man’s faith in the integrity of the FBI and the justice of courts. Unfortunately, over time my faith has been eroded by the slow recognition that money and power speak here as clearly as anywhere in life. That the quality of your representation often determines your fate. And, he who can buy lawyers with influence can prevail.

The primary question not asked of James Comey is simple. If you thought, after the first meeting, that such contact between yourself and the President of the United States was inappropriate, why did you continue on eight additional times? Why didn’t you just say, I believe this contact is inappropriate and suggest that the President communicate with his Attorney General? And, if you did not trust Donald Trump to tell the future and were compelled to take notes, again, why didn’t you suggest that all contact be handled by the Attorney General? In fact, why did not contemporaneously inform the Attorney General and the White House Counsel of your feelings?

I have little or no doubt that Comey is not above tailoring his story to fit his own political agenda, and seeing the musings of a politically inept President as an ocean of political opportunity. It is my belief that Comey has been politicized, not now, but in previous years – and possibly by that progressive socialist democrat miscreant Chuck Schumer.

Rather than being an observer and reporter of bad news, Comey appears to have crossed the line into a political player. And for this, he should be investigated by the special counsel and held accountable for his actions.

As for President Trump, let us hope that the campaign’s mantra, “let Donald be Donald,” is tempered with prudent advice and a lack of tweets.

There is nothing good here. Once again, we learn that we cannot trust our government, in particular, government agencies that should be neutral and above politics. And that what happens behind closed doors is not always the same story given to the American public.